Not sure if this has been proposed before or even it is at all feasible,
but how about changing the last/first letter?
Quantum -> QuantuS, QuantuN, Cuantum...?
There are a plenty of options to go by.
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 5:28 PM, Monty Taylor wrote:
>
>
> On 05/13/2013 11:03 AM, Doug Hellma
>
> Very thankful for you're time.
> Regards,
>
> Egoirz Aurrekoetxea Aurre
> ego...@ramattack.net
> Sent from my smartphone
>
> El 02/11/2012, a las 18:47, Armando Migliaccio
> escribió:
>
> Hi,
>
> If I understand your request correctly, say you have two stor
Hi,
If I understand your request correctly, say you have two storage backends
with different QoS and you want to use both of them in your OpenStack/XCP
deployment, what you can do is:
1) create SR1 for XCP1 that maps to storage array at QoS1
1a) configure the compute domU for XCP1 to point to SR1
I'd be interest to join too. Shall we use a wiki page to collate names
and affiliations of people interested (there's a Launchpad group set
up by the way - https://launchpad.net/~openstack-xenapi), as well as
meeting details?
Thanks,
Armando
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Alan Kavanagh
wrote:
1.3GB is more than enough. When you get that message, usually space
has already dried up, or there is a problem authenticating with
xenapi.
Check that:
xenapi_connection_url
xenapi_connection_password
are set correctly, and that you can reach dom0 from your devstack instance.
Have a look at you
Another perspective worth considering is immaturity vs growth. Are
there enough progresses being made? When problems are identified, are
these solved swiftly and effectively? I think the people involved in
the OpenStack community do and have done a great job in this regard,
and should be praised ra
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 7:10 PM, Vishvananda Ishaya
wrote:
>
> On Apr 3, 2012, at 6:45 AM, Day, Phil wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
> Maybe the problem with host aggregates is that it too quickly became
> something that was linked to hypervisor capability, rather than being the
> more general mechanism of w
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Michaël Van de Borne <
michael.vandebo...@cetic.be> wrote:
> Hi Donal,
>
> Still about this good old 'Boot From ISO' feature inside the XenAPI: I
> packaged a custom netinstall.iso image which boots and installs the OS with
> kickstart. So that everything is cust
check you have XenAPI installed on your system.
'sudo easy_install xenapi' should suffice.
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Eduardo Nunes wrote:
> got this error on log, 2012-03-15 16:52:33,809 ERROR nova.compute.manager
> [-] Unable to load the virtualization driver: No module named XenAPI
> m
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Josh Kearney wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 7:17 AM, Thierry Carrez
> wrote:
>>
>> So I'd rather work on formally splitting the nova-core group into
>> smaller topic-oriented review groups, which would ensure that code
>> affecting a given area is reviewed by th
Cool stuff...I wonder if this could be auto-generated at every milestone, it'd
be awesome to keep it up to date :)
From: openstack-bounces+armando.migliaccio=eu.citrix@lists.launchpad.net
[mailto:openstack-bounces+armando.migliaccio=eu.citrix@lists.launchpad.net]
On Behalf Of Armaan
Sen
> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Windisch [mailto:e...@cloudscaling.com]
> Sent: 02 March 2012 19:04
> To: Joshua Harlow
> Cc: Armando Migliaccio; Jay Pipes; openstack
> Subject: Re: [Openstack] eventlet weirdness
>
> The problem is that unless you sleep(0)
I knew you'd say that :P
There you go: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/944145
Cheers,
Armando
> -Original Message-
> From: Jay Pipes [mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 02 March 2012 16:22
> To: Armando Migliaccio
> Cc: openstack@lists.launchpad.net
>
> -Original Message-
> From: openstack-bounces+armando.migliaccio=eu.citrix@lists.launchpad.net
> [mailto:openstack-
> bounces+armando.migliaccio=eu.citrix@lists.launchpad.net] On Behalf Of Jay
> Pipes
> Sent: 02 March 2012 15:17
> To: openstack@lists.launchpad.net
> Subject: Re:
See comments inline.
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Washenberger [mailto:mark.washenber...@rackspace.com]
> Sent: 15 February 2012 15:51
> To: Gabe Westmaas
> Cc: Armando Migliaccio; Jay Pipes; openstack@lists.launchpad.net
> Subject: Re: [Openstack] Remove Zones co
I am a bit lost...what has size got to do with relationship?
> -Original Message-
> From: Jay Pipes [mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 15 February 2012 14:36
> To: Gabe Westmaas
> Cc: Armando Migliaccio; Martin Paulo; openstack@lists.launchpad.net
> Subject: Re: [Opens
-1 for ServerGroup because in the OSAPI terminology Server is a guest instance
rather than a physical host.
I assume that the relationship between zone and availability zone will still
exist (and I remind you that host-aggregates have been coming along to). So you
have:
?? <--> Availability Zo
citrix@lists.launchpad.net
> [mailto:openstack-
> bounces+armando.migliaccio=eu.citrix@lists.launchpad.net] On Behalf Of
> Armando Migliaccio
> Sent: 02 February 2012 11:52
> To: Thierry Carrez; openstack@lists.launchpad.net
> Subject: Re: [Openstack] [Nova] Essex dead wood
To the best of my knowledge, the ESXi support is up to date. There may be bugs,
but which virt driver is perfect ;)?
Sateesh may know more, because he is the main contributor/maintainer from
Citrix.
However, as Vish pointed out in a previous email, any driver is doomed to rot
if:
a) no one is
Hi folks,
I am asking for a Feature-Freeze exception for the blueprint
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/host-aggregates.
I appreciate that is now late for getting the bulk of this feature into E3,
however we are ready to get this feature early in E4.
We have got a few reviews in t
Is this what you're looking for?
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/disk-configuration-parity
A.
> -Original Message-
> From: openstack-bounces+armando.migliaccio=eu.citrix@lists.launchpad.net
> [mailto:openstack-
> bounces+armando.migliaccio=eu.citrix@lists.launchpad.ne
ing to see some
swift-bench figures if available.
Many thanks,
Rustam.
On 10/01/2012 13:59, Armando Migliaccio wrote:
We (Citrix) have used CentOS 5.5 (kernel 2.6.18-194.32.1.el5xen), in small
pilot environments. Our choice has fallen on CentOS for reasons that I am not
going to bore you with.
We (Citrix) have used CentOS 5.5 (kernel 2.6.18-194.32.1.el5xen), in small
pilot environments. Our choice has fallen on CentOS for reasons that I am not
going to bore you with. We are going to switch to Ubuntu not because of
performance but primarily because of packaging.
What are your concerns
There is a blueprint that touches these aspects:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/guest-ha
This is tailored at use cases where you cannot redesign an existing app.
The work is at the early stages, but you are more than welcome to join the
effort!
Cheers,
Armando
> -Original Me
e a risk of
tangling the zone management API a bit?
Thanks for feedback!
Cheers,
Armando
> -Original Message-
> From: Sandy Walsh [mailto:sandy.wa...@rackspace.com]
> Sent: 09 November 2011 21:10
> To: Armando Migliaccio
> Cc: openstack@lists.launchpad.net
> Subject: Hos
Hi Devin,
thanks for this update. Below you mentioned support for managing Nova volumes,
floating IPs. Can you tell us a bit more about this?
I cannot see a volume section in the dashboard UI, are there specific
extensions to pull into the code?
Thanks,
Armando
> -Original Message-
>
If you run OpenStack you are NOT forced to use libvirt; you can also use XCP
(i.e. Xen Cloud Platform)/XenServer, or ESXi by setting the following flag
appropriately:
--connection_type
Libvirt supports Xen too (which is different from XCP/XenServer).
From: openstack-bounces+armando.migliaccio=
I second what Ewan said about the coding style in nova.virt.xenapi. I was
responsible for part of refactoring and I am no longer fond of it either. I
still think that it was good to break xenapi.py down as we did, but with
hindsight I would like to revise some of the choices made, and make the c
es
> mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 6:41 AM, Armando Migliaccio
>> mailto:armando.migliac...@eu.citrix.com>>
>> wrote:
>> > I have noticed that recently a new way of configuring nova-api has been
>> > intr
Hi,
I have noticed that recently a new way of configuring nova-api has been
introduced. It seems that the old gflags style has been replaced in favour of
paste.deploy style.
I am trying to find information about this transition, and how old config files
can be translated to new ones. Do we jus
k [mailto:r...@openstack.org]
> Sent: 21 December 2010 18:55
> To: Armando Migliaccio
> Cc: openstack@lists.launchpad.net
> Subject: Re: [Openstack] Merge proposals and criteria for approval
>
> That is an excellent question. I'm not sure we have any criteria for the
> order
More than thoughts, I have a question: what criteria are selected to order the
merges under review? Length of the diff/priority of the blueprint etc?
Thanks,
Armando
> -Original Message-
> From: openstack-bounces+armando.migliaccio=eu.citrix@lists.launchpad.net
> [mailto:openstack-
>
aunchpad.net/~jaypipes/nova/i18n-strings/+merge/43436
>
> * xenapi-unittests
> This is blocking a lot of the xs-* specs, since it's better to land them
> once this one is in, rather than before. This one hasn't been reviewed yet:
> https://code.launchpad.net/~armando-migliac
33 matches
Mail list logo
